1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Indiana Gov. signs "religious freedom" bill into law

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by SnarkShark, Mar 26, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Humungus

    Humungus Member

    Also, what if the writer/columnist in this hypothetical situation is black?
     
  2. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    Federal law requires an employer to issue a religious accommodation to an employee if it can reasonably be managed.
     
  3. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Of course, someone refusing to do something for which they're receiving financial compensation is different than discrimination in the name of religion.
     
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Which sounds like employees have more rights than business owners.

    If I refused to repair a coffee brewer at Hamburger Mary's, it sounds like I could be in trouble, but I couldn't fire an employee who refused?
     
  5. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Of course you could. You're paying them for services they didn't deliver.

    The two situations are not analogous at all.
     
  6. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    When Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis refused to pick up blind people who used service dogs, a "reasonable accommodation" was made where the next cab driver willing to take the blind passenger would take them, and the Muslim cab driver didn't lose his place in line.

    And, while this sounds like a reasonable measure, isn't this "discrimination" against blind people in just the same way that not photographing a wedding would be "discriminating" against a gay couple?

    Isn't it a withholding of services in a way that we're told should not be allowed?
     
  7. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    We must be talking past each other.

    Where do we disagree?
     
  8. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    Didn't those cab drivers LOSE in court, multiple times? That's kind of the point here - people who do the same thing will have the power of law behind them.
     
  9. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I think MC's referring to the columnist as someone who's already been paid for his/her services. But he's treating the worker as someone who hasn't been paid yet.
     
  10. Big Circus

    Big Circus Well-Known Member

    Clearly YF needs to put his repairmen on salary. Then we'd all be on the same page.
     
  11. SnarkShark

    SnarkShark Well-Known Member

  12. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Nice manipulation using a poster who has made his bigotry quite clear over the years. Point being, your post is a bit unfair because we would also have his history as a factor in judging his actions.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page